DOCSLIB.ORG

Centre for Excellence in Child and Family Welfare and Victorian Council of Social Service

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Centre for Excellence in Child and Family Welfare and Victorian Council of Social Service Centre for Excellence in Child and Family Welfare and Victorian Council of Social Service Responding to the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse Wednesday 1 May 2013 Organisational Governance- Risks and Responsibilities Peter Johnstone OAM Chairman, VincentCare Victoria Introduction I’d like to start with a couple of introductory remarks. The subject we’re dealing with is a horrible story of a failure of our society to protect our most vulnerable and innocent members from the worst of abuse that goes far beyond physical harm to the distortion of their emotional and social development and in many cases the loss of their lives – this failure has resulted in the actual and the emotional loss of lives, of not only abused children but of many close to them. Probably no one comes to this subject without some baggage so let me declare mine. I am a practising Catholic who has been active in many Catholic welfare and social justice organisations over many years. I am very concerned about the governance of the Catholic Church and see the child abuse scandal as a symptom of wider governance failures in the Church. I have been involved in submitting and presenting to the Victorian Parliamentary Inquiry Into The Handling Of Child Abuse By Religious And Other Non-Government Organisations. I also have a broader long-term interest in public and not-for- profit community services, social justice, and high standards of leadership and governance. Given my Catholic background and the significant failures of my church in this societal failure, I will refer to the Catholic Church more than other organisations that have failed in protecting children in their care. I believe however that the points I make regarding governance and leadership apply across the board in this failure of our society to protect our most vulnerable and innocent members. I want to stress that the sexual abuse scandal has two levels of criminality: 1. The actual sexual abuse of so many children, and 2. The aggravation of those abuses by organisations who were responsible for the abusers – failing to act in accordance with the organisation’s basic values, and protecting criminal abusers, protecting the organisation at the expense of children, and worse, exposing further children to criminal abuse. I will be focusing on institutional failures as I have been asked to talk about issues of organisational governance in the context of the Royal Commission. What are the risks and responsibilities for those institutions and what are the responsibilities of organisations’ boards and their staff? Victorian Parliamentary Inquiry The current Victorian Parliamentary Inquiry Into The Handling Of Child Abuse By Religious And Other Non-Government Organisations is providing some idea of the pain and suffering that will be exposed, to a much greater extent, by the national Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. 2 On Tuesday this week, Brother Tim Graham, the superior of the St John of God order in Australia and New Zealand, acknowledged to the Victorian Parliamentary Inquiry that there had been a systemic failure of scrutiny and accountability. I’ve been following the inquiry fairly closely and I think this is the first admission of systemic inadequacies in governance. On the same day, the former bishop of Ballarat, Peter Connors, acknowledged to the same inquiry that there had been a persistent determination to retain known paedophile priest Paul David Ryan, despite the high risk. He commented that his predecessor Bishop Ronald Mulkearns made “terrible errors” and showed “great naivety” in moving paedophiles Gerald Ridsdale and Paul Ryan from parish to parish despite knowing they were child abusers. While Bishop Connors’ honesty and genuine horror should be acknowledged, to speak of “terrible errors” and “great naivety” on the part of a church leader who effectively facilitated the sexual abuse of more children, begs the question as to the type of governance systems and structures that spawned such errors and naivety. The Victorian Parliamentary Inquiry has been conducting hearings since October last year and there has been much evidence of organisations who failed fundamentally in their governance in dealing with the systemic sexual abuse and rape of children. So what can we expect from the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse? Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse Francis Sullivan, CEO of the Catholic organisation set up to deal with the Royal Commission (the Truth Justice and Healing Council) has said publicly that the Church must be open with the Commission and admit to ‘cover-ups’ - a creditably transparent and accountable approach. 3 Last Saturday’s Age newspaper reported that the Australian Catholic Church has recruited Ian Elliott, the head of the Irish Catholic Board for Safeguarding Children, as an advisor on child sex abuse. Mr Elliott says he is “not a fan” of government inquiries into child abuse in the Church. He apparently considers that organisational failures can be identified and corrected without government inquiries. I think Mr Elliott is wrong in the case of Australia and, with respect, Ireland also. And this Royal Commission is not just about ‘the Church’ but is required to “investigate Institutional (my emphasis) Responses to Child Sexual Abuse”, a very wide- ranging focus extending to all organisations, including government organisations. Francis Sullivan and Ian Elliott present different attitudes to the role of the Royal Commission, but they probably reflect the range of responses in the religious and not-for-profit sectors in Australia. Both responses however acknowledge that as well as the individual crimes of violations of children, institutional failures have occurred that have aggravated the individual crimes of sexual abuse. The Royal Commission will no doubt comment on the gravity of such governance failures. I would suggest that considerable evidence of moral failure and criminal behaviour by institutions is already in the public domain. Corporate Governance Institutional failures, and certainly institutional crimes, are matters of corporate governance and reflect inadequate leadership of many organisations. The Australian National Audit Office describes corporate governance as “the processes by which organisations are directed, controlled and held to account. It encompasses authority, accountability, stewardship, leadership, direction and control exercised in the organisation.” 4 The OECD Principles of Corporate Governance point to the importance of “business ethics and corporate awareness of . societal interests of the communities in which (an organisation) operates.” In short, corporate governance is about organisations achieving their missions in an accountable and ethical manner, focused on outcomes, and managing risks; it is about living their values in a culture that ensures the commitment of their people to the organisation’s goals and values. It is about boards and managers meeting their responsibilities for effective and ethical leadership. There are positive and negative incentives for ensuring good governance in any organisation. On the positive side, good governance is about an organisation being successful, and the ethical requirements should be a given, indeed a bonus, for church and charitable organisations whose very existence is for the good of society. On the negative side, there are serious risks associated with poor governance, from failing to achieve outcomes to suffering reputational damage, criminal penalties, and injuring innocent people. The Royal Commission’s role The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse is an extraordinary action by government, an initiative supported by all sides of politics and by State governments. It is extraordinary not only because Royal Commissions are in themselves an extraordinary government response, but also because this royal commission addresses: a. Crimes against children within trusted institutions b. A failure by those trusted institutions to respond adequately, and c. Criminal responses by those trusted institutions by: i. Covering up the offences ii. Protecting the abusers, and 5 iii. Exposing more children to harm through failure to report the abusers to State authorities. The Royal Commission is tasked to seek justice for victims, and to ensure necessary changes to society and its institutions in order to prevent such scandalous situations ever recurring. The Commission’s Letters Patent direct it “to inquire into institutional responses to allegations and incidents of child sexual abuse and related matters.” The Letters Patent require that “claims of systemic failures by institutions in relation to allegations and incidents of child sexual abuse and any related unlawful or improper treatment of children be fully explored, and that best practice (be) identified so that it may be followed in the future both to protect against the occurrence of child sexual abuse and to respond appropriately when any allegations and incidents of child sexual abuse occur, including holding perpetrators to account and providing justice to victims.” (underlining added) The Commission has received widespread and bipartisan support because its focus is a societal failure through abysmal failures of organisational governance, which involved organisations with a commitment to good works presiding over the worst of criminal abuse against the most vulnerable, namely
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Swag Theswag.Org.Au | Vol
    Quarterly magazine of the National Council of Priests of Australia The Swag theswag.org.au | Vol. 25 No. 1 | Autumn 2017 REGULARS NCP CONTACTS From the NCP Chairman ................................................3 Editorial .....................................................................................4 Letters to the Editor .........................................................32 News ..................................................................................33-36 Reviews ............................................................................37-39 Returned to God .........................................................40-42 FEATURES Chairman Secretary Treasurer Seminary formation and the Rev Jim Clarke Rev Mark Freeman Rev Wayne Bendotti 44 Margaret St Royal Commission ..............................................................5 2 Taylors Lane PO Box 166 Rowville VIC 3178 Launceston TAS 7250 Dardanup WA 6236 Enemy inside the gate ................................................... 6-7 P: (03) 9764 4058 P: (03) 6331 4377 P: (08) 9728 1145 Young people to set agenda for Synod .......................7 F: (03) 9764 5154 F: (03) 6334 1906 F: (08) 9728 0000 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Burdens of office .............................................................. 8-9 Association of Catholic Priests .............................10-11 Bishop Mulkearns – canonist and friend ........11-12 Towards a change of parish contours ................12-14 Back to following
    [Show full text]
  • Child Sexual Abuse in the General Community and Clergy-Perpetrated Child Sexual Abuse
    Child Sexual Abuse in the General Community and Clergy-Perpetrated Child Sexual Abuse A Review Paper prepared for the Australian Psychological Society to inform an APS Response to the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse Professor Jill Astbury MAPS July 2013 2 CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE GENERAL COMMUNITY AND CLERGY-PERPETRATED CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE CONTENTS Background ................................................................................................................................................ 5 Scope of the current review ................................................................................................................... 6 PART ONE: CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE (CSA) IN THE GENERAL COMMUNITY .................................... 7 Prevalence and mental health consequences of CSA...................................................................... 7 Prevalence globally .............................................................................................................................. 7 Prevalence in Australia ....................................................................................................................... 7 Long term mental health consequences ........................................................................................ 7 Suicide ..................................................................................................................................................... 9 Determinants of long term mental health outcomes ...............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ground Zero: How the Ballarat Diocese Exported Paedophiles to the World ___
    1/26/2021 Ground zero: How the Ballarat diocese exported paedophiles to the world ___ National Victoria Sins of the Seminary This was published 1 year ago Ground zero: How the Ballarat diocese exported paedophiles to the world By Debbie Cuthbertson, Andrew Thomson, Farrah Tomazin and Chris Vedelago Updated September 23, 2019 — 2.26pm, first published at 11.44am Save Share A A A 12 View all comments EDITOR'S NOTE: The High Court overturned Cardinal George Pell's conviction for historic child sex offences in a judgment handed down April 7, 2020. In a unanimous decision all seven High Court judges found Victoria's Court of Appeal should not have upheld Pell's conviction. It found the evidence could not support a guilty verdict. “Brother Paul” still causes nightmares for Darren*. The Christian brother, full name Kenneth Paul McGlade, raped the 10-year-old Warrnambool boy at St Joseph’s Christian Brothers College in 1969. Half a century later, Darren still bears a physical reminder. https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/ground-zero-how-the-ballarat-diocese-exported-paedophiles-to-the-world-20190923-p52tvq.html 1/10 1/26/2021 Ground zero: How the Ballarat diocese exported paedophiles to the world *Darren, now 61, says he was raped by a Christian Brother at St Joseph's Christian Brothers School in Warrnambool when he was 10. MARK WITTE/WARRNAMBOOL STANDARD "The day after he attacked me I started chewing my fingernails, so bad I've got no nail on my left little finger,” he said. "I used to hold it under my hand so no one would see it.” Now, at 61, Darren is finally feeling strong enough to tell his story in support of other victims.
    [Show full text]
  • Ellis: a Post Royal Commission Analysis
    Ellis: a post Royal Commission analysis Mitchell Landrigan Overview This article is a study of the “Ellis defence”. It is also the story of John Ellis’ struggle against the Catholic Church. As a child, John Ellis was the victim of a priest’s sexual abuse. As will be seen, the difficulty John Ellis encountered in Ellis1 in suing any person or body apart from the offending priest (who died), arose from the application of orthodox legal principles to the particular struc- ture of the Catholic Church. The legal issue in Ellis arose because the Catholic Church, like other Christian denominations, is an unincorporated association with a fluctuating membership. John Ellis could not establish tort liability against an unincorporated association. He also could not engage the rules for the appointment of a representative to be sued on behalf of that unincorporated association. The applicable property trust that held the assets of the Catholic Church had no liability because it had not held management responsibility for the offending priest. The Archbishop of the Sydney Catholic Archdiocese had no responsibility for any negligence of his predecessors. Despite its legal orthodoxy, Ellis had profound implications. A key theoreti- cal implication of this essay is that the Ellis defence may disincentivise churches from prohibiting paedophilia. The defence may also lead to tacit toleration of children’s abuse. The doctrine therefore has great significance for law and religion in Australia. The article highlights the implications of Ellis for victims of child sexual abuse from three viewpoints. First, the perspective of the victim, John Ellis, who sought to engage with the Sydney Catholic Archdiocese under the Towards Healing protocol before he commenced pretrial litigation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Royal Commission Into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse Continued Case Study 28 Today
    The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse continued Case Study 28 today. Case Study 28 is looking at the Diocese of Ballarat, and began the first stage of its hearing in May 2015. A third sitting for Ballarat will occur in February 2016. In today’s hearing, the testimony of Father John McKinnon concluded, and the Commission also heard from Father John Walshe, Father Lawrence O’Toole, Father Dan Arundell and survivor BPD. Continued testimony of Father John McKinnon Father McKinnon was asked briefly about his knowledge of offending by Paul David Ryan and Father BPB. He told the Commission that he did not recall much, but said that he instinctively disliked Ryan because he had a superior attitude. He also spoke about Bishop Ronald Mulkearns, and said that while his enormous respect for confidentiality and the protection of a person’s reputation could also be a vice, because respect for privacy carries with it the potential for cover up. Father McKinnon spoke about his recent contact with Bishop Mulkearns [who is currently in palliative care.] He told the Commission that Bishop Mulkearns struggles to sleep at night because the Commission is on his mind, and said that Bishop Mulkearns is profoundly sorry for what he had and had not done. Testimony of Father John Walshe Father John Walshe is a Priest of the Archdiocese of Melbourne, who provided the Commission with a statement regarding the accusations made by David Ridsdale against Cardinal George Pell. David Ridsdale alleged that in February 1993, he phoned then-
    [Show full text]
  • Australian Church Could Face Millions in Claims After Court Admission by Diocese
    Australian church could face millions in claims after court admission by diocese The Australian Catholic Church could face tens of millions dollars in compensation claims after the Diocese of Ballarat in Victoria state admitted, for the first time, it knew of the behavior of a pedophile priest yet continued to move him around from parish to parish. Former priest Gerald Ridsdale, 85, is one of Australia’s most notorious pedophiles and is serving an 11-year prison sentence due to finish in 2028, the latest in a series of convictions for the abuse of 85 children. Ridsdale held 16 different appointments during 29 years as a priest, an average of 1.8 years per appointment. The church’s admission was made in the case of JCB v. Bishop Paul Bird for the Diocese of Ballarat, in which a defendant with a pseudonym is suing the diocese for his rape, at age 9, by Ridsdale at the tiny country town of Mortlake in 1982. A mediation hearing will be held on Oct. 15 and, if this is unsuccessful, a 10- day civil trial will begin Jan. 29 to determine the amount of damages the church will pay the victim. At the time of JCB’s rape, Bishop Ronald Mulkearns headed the Diocese of Ballarat. Ridsdale abused dozens of children during his time in Mortlake. “We believe it is the first time in Victoria that the Catholic Church has admitted it failed to protect a victim of child sex abuse and is therefore legally liable,” the victim’s lawyer, Judy Courtin, said in a statement.
    [Show full text]
  • Gerald Ridsdale, Pedophile Priest, in His Own Words James Franklin* One Major Difficulty in Understanding the Clerical Abuse
    Gerald Ridsdale, Pedophile Priest, In His Own Words James Franklin* One major difficulty in understanding the clerical abuse scandal in the Catholic Church has been that the abusers themselves have not told their story. There has been virtually no account of their crimes by themselves, no apologies, no repentance. That changed with the appearance of Gerald Ridsdale before the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse on 27-28 May 2015. Ridsdale is believed to be Australia’s worst priest sexual abuser of children. He was convicted of offences against 53 children, including many rapes, but that is thought to be a small proportion of his victims. Sitting in Ballarat, the Commission heard two days of testimony from Ridsdale. He appeared by videolink from prison, where he has been since 1994. He gave the impression of being an honest and cooperative witness, though notably affectless. At age 81, his memory was very patchy, but the Commission was able to supplement it with some earlier material, especially a 1994 account he gave of his actions.1 His oral evidence and the earlier document provide a unique opportunity to see into the mind of a pedophile priest. Since the Commission’s brief was to investigate the responses of institutions rather than the abuse itself, questioning by Gail Furness SC focussed on who knew about his offending and what they did or did not do about it. In this article however we select that part of the evidence where Ridsdale talks about himself. The testimony was streamed live. Gerald Ridsdale appearing before Graham Richardson wrote after watching the Royal Commission, May 2015 1 Part of the 1994 document is in the Commission’s exhibits at http://www.
    [Show full text]
  • Sexual Assault and the Catholic Church: Are Victims Finding Justice?
    SEXUAL ASSAULT AND THE CATHOLIC CHURCH: ARE VICTIMS FINDING JUSTICE? JUDITH COURTIN Bachelor of Laws (Honours) Graduate Diploma in Legal Practice Bachelor of Applied Science This thesis is presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Monash University (2015) Faculty of Law j Contents _A_bs_tr_a_ct~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~v Statement of Candidate Contribution vi Copyright Notice vi Acknowledgements vii Preface viii Definition of Core Terms x Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Introduction 2 1.2 Background and context for this research 3 1.2.1 Media exposure in Australia 3 1.2.2 Victorian Parliament Inquiry 5 1.2.3 NSW Special Commission of Inquiry 5 1.2.4 National Royal Commission 6 1.2.5 Victorian Crime Prevention Committee 7 1.2.6 International Church-initiated Inquiries 8 1.2.7 International State-initiated Inquiries 13 1.2.8 International Royal Commissions 16 1.3 Why this research is important 17 1.3.1 Civil pathway 17 1.3.2 Criminal prosecutions 19 1.3.3 Victims of crime compensation schemes 23 1.3.4 The Catholic Church's internal complaints p rocesses 23 1.4 Aims of the research 24 1.5 What is justice? 24 1.5.1 Retributive justice 25 1.5.2 Corrective justice 25 1.5.3 Distributive justice 26 1.5.4 Restorative justice: victim-centred justice 26 1.5.5 Procedural justice 29 1.5.6 Transitional justice: truth recovery and denial 29 1.5.7 International human rights law principles: the right to the truth to end impunity 32 1.6 Outline of chapters 35 Chapter 2 Research Design: Methodology 37 2.1 Introduction 38 2.2 Project proposal: a conceptual
    [Show full text]